Recent content by Rajatmo

ya, that's what i meant when i said "i'm lousy at the abstract thing". just check my answers. it's correct and i think that's enough reason it should be correct. i can't explain more. i thought of those points because they just occurred to me. furthermore, this proves that you can't treat ∞ as...

if anything's wrong, you can say it CLEARLY cause I'm just a high school student and I'm lousy at the "abstract" thing. As far as I can get from your comment, there seems nothing wrong in my answer.

I don't think anyone would ever think to do it (why don't you do it yourself?) but, there are some subtle things to account for the dispersal pattern that indeed will show up. you can imagine that yourself. and, nowadays, the theory of light as EM wave is largely replaced with the probabilistic...

yeah, actually that's what i was trying to do. the (r,\phi,\theta) possible coordinates are, r=∞, \varphi=any number ≠ 0,n\pi/2, \theta= any number ≠ 0,n\pi/2 (n integer) check them.

All you'll have to understand is that the term is "proper time-interval" not "proper time". the proper time interval is the time interval observed in a reference frame in which the two events that determines the time interval occurs in the same place. the proper length is the length measured in...

hey, this is a fanciful question. this experiment, if actually carried out at all, wouldn't give any "measurable" and satisfactory result. the diffraction effects would be so small (you can calculate it using de Broglie hypothesis) that it cannot be measured. furthermore, the two-"slit"...

questions like these can be solved in your head! first, for the current, the net resistance of the topmost two resistors is 5 ohm. now, the reciprocal of 5 is .2 and the reciprocal of 20 is .05 as you should be able to do immediately. they add up to be .25 - which is the reciprocal of the net...

yeah, infinities do not cancel out like that. If you're trying to set up the limits of an multiple integral, you may try to do it "intuitively". first, think of the "grids" in the spherical coordinates, which are spherical shells, cones and planes (try some books to understand these). then...

Oh. that is easily solved. Make change of variables in the familiar transform you understand clearly to include the 2\pi in the exponent, THEN see if the product of coefficients of Fourier and inverse Fourier transforms gives the factor claimed. if they are the same, this is correct, if it is...

See M.L.Boas - "Mathematical Methods" for disambiguation. I had the same problem and it really helped me.